House passes "Protect Life Act"

the bill disallows abortion if the insurance carrier receives any federal funding, which will apparently be most private insurance. It would also allow a hospital to refuse treatment to women seeking abortions even if it's a life-saving procedure.

It's not really an argument but rather my opinion. I don't argue abortion in threads or in real life, since most of the time people's minds are already made up and I'm not going to change it. My opinion on abortion was formed over 25 years ago studying anatomy and physiology in nursing school, just like my opinion on God was formed studying astronomy. Keeping my mind open to new ideas and learning new things has shaped me, but this one issue hasn't seemed to budge in 25 years.

I learned the hard way when on this very forum about 15 or longer years ago I said, I remember it like it was yesterday "it amazes that a vegan whom argues how immoral it is to swat a fly would abort a baby". (It still baffles me). I was jumped on like flies on shit...one even saying "a fetus is really nothing but a parasite invading my body". So I definitely know when to express myself and when to back down and shut up.

It's also one of my greatest shames because while it's not a religious or conservative viewpoint for me...it's scientific, most pro-lifers are people I can't stand. At the end of the day it's not an issue I'm remotely passionate about. Meh

Ultimately however, I do draw a line, reasonable or not, at providing abortions just so a poor person can have sex. Non-medically necessary abortions should be paid out of pocket and I'm fully aware it's an impossibility for many poor people, it's another mouth to feed, and another child on welfare. It's a line I draw and I if it makes no sense to anyone but me, I don't care.

In my opinion. (Dammit, I don't do abortion threads..but I still think you're the most awesome person alive.)

From the National Poverty Center - "In 2010, 15.1 percent of all persons lived in poverty. The poverty rate in 2010 was the highest poverty rate since 1993. Between 1993 and 2000, the poverty rate fell each year, reaching 11.3 percent in 2000. "

So basically what your opinion boils down to is we should make it illegal for 15.1% of our country to have sex because they are poor.

So basically what your opinion boils down to is we should make it illegal for 15.1% of our country to have sex because they are poor.

I don't see how you can possibly spin what I've said into that.

However, it's obviously confusing to you, and understandably so. Let me clarify. Josh seemed to hint that abortions should be allowed since poor people are being backed into a corner between abstinence and pregnancy since they can't afford birth control. I agree 100% that we shouldn't back them into a corner by cutting off prevention and telling them not to have sex. However, I am also saying that abortion should not be one of those preventative birth control options paid for with my tax dollars (even if it means the child is placed on welfare since for me it's an ethical stance, not a financial one).

For probably 90% of the readers and posters here this will end with an "agree to disagree" and I will not argue....only clarify and state my opinion without allowing it to be a tiny blip on my emotional radar. I respect that others will have their own opinion and have a right to express it.

Here's what I was arguing: I was saying that we as a society shouldn't back people into a corner. As I see it - taking away access to preventative measures (e.g. condoms, birth control) and not allowing people to choose for themselves over their own bodies, one forces individuals into a corner. When forced into the corner, the individual is given two choices: pregnancy or abstinence. When one backs people into a corner, the cornered loses their freedom.

How does one get into the corner? People have sex!! Taking away preventative measures (e.g. birth control, condoms) will more than likely lead to pregnancy. If pregnancy isn't wanted, abstinence is the other alternative which hurts our growth as individuals.

In my opinion, the best solution is to let people have sex if they so choose. Let people be free and have sex if they want and let them have access to the meds we've created. Unless they're hurting others, not allowing people to be who they are hurts us all..unless your a criminal nutjob. Freedom to decide for our own lives is what our country should be embracing. Freedom and the pursuit of happiness, right? Taking away a woman's right to have control over her own body is going backwards as a society. As I see it, taking away her individual control is being turned into a political and manipulative tool that will ultimately hurt us.

From an insurance perspective, I personally don't care what other policyholders use their insurance for. I feel that we're all paying into the pot and it should be used however it needs to be. If Jim needs a new liver and Karen needs an abortion because she was raped, I don't care. They both need to be covered. I don't want insurance companies making decisions based on how much money can they make or whatever. Having them as the middleman also gives up our freedoms as individuals. But, again, we all pay into it and we should all get the coverage we need.

Sidenote: I agree, I don't think women would ever try to use abortion as a form of birth control. Women who have abortions don't take them lightly. I'm sure there are some that do but we can't judge the whole by the extremist few.

So basically what your opinion boils down to is we should make it illegal for 15.1% of our country to have sex because they are poor.

I don't see how you can possibly spin what I've said into that. However, it's obviously confusing to you, and understandably so.

It's not confusing in the slightest. You were quite clear in what you said.

Ultimately however, I do draw a line, reasonable or not, at providing abortions just so a poor person can have sex. Non-medically necessary abortions should be paid out of pocket and I'm fully aware it's an impossibility for many poor people, it's another mouth to feed, and another child on welfare. It's a line I draw and I if it makes no sense to anyone but me, I don't care.

From an insurance perspective, I personally don't care what other policyholders use their insurance for. I feel that we're all paying into the pot and it should be used however it needs to be. If Jim needs a new liver and Karen needs an abortion because she was raped, I don't care. They both need to be covered. I don't want insurance companies making decisions based on how much money can they make or whatever. Having them as the middleman also gives up our freedoms as individuals. But, again, we all pay into it and we should all get the coverage we need.

Here's what I was arguing: I was saying that we as a society shouldn't back people into a corner. As I see it - taking away access to preventative measures (e.g. condoms, birth control) and not allowing people to choose for themselves over their own bodies, one forces individuals into a corner. When forced into the corner, the individual is given two choices: pregnancy or abstinence. When one backs people into a corner, the cornered loses their freedom.

How does one get into the corner? People have sex!! Taking away preventative measures (e.g. birth control, condoms) will more than likely lead to pregnancy. If pregnancy isn't wanted, abstinence is the other alternative which hurts our growth as individuals.

In my opinion, the best solution is to let people have sex if they so choose. Let people be free and have sex if they want and let them have access to the meds we've created. Unless they're hurting others, not allowing people to be who they are hurts us all..unless your a criminal nutjob. Freedom to decide for our own lives is what our country should be embracing. Freedom and the pursuit of happiness, right? Taking away a woman's right to have control over her own body is going backwards as a society. As I see it, taking away her individual control is being turned into a political and manipulative tool that will ultimately hurt us.

As I've said twice. I 100% agree with you. We should not take away people's access to prevention with budget cuts. I'm totally against that. It's counterproductive.

But if you get pregnant I don't want to pay for your abortion.

Mirrya1, remember I don't argue, but if you're taking that because I say non-medically necessary abortions be paid for out of pocket by the individual, that I mean I think it should be illegal for poor people to have sex, then that's your spin and it is what it is to you. I've clarified my stance. What you think of my anti-abortion stance is none of my business.

an insurance perspective, I personally don't care what other policyholders use their insurance for. I feel that we're all paying into the pot and it should be used however it needs to be. If Jim needs a new liver and Karen needs an abortion because she was raped, I don't care. They both need to be covered. I don't want insurance companies making decisions based on how much money can they make or whatever. Having them as the middleman also gives up our freedoms as individuals. But, again, we all pay into it and we should all get the coverage we need.

Sidenote: I agree, I don't think women would ever try to use abortion as a form of birth control. Women who have abortions don't take them lightly. I'm sure there are some that do but we can't judge the whole by the extremist few.

I agree that insurance companies have too much power in deciding who gets what. My sister's ovary had to become the size of a grapefruit and experienced a lot of pain before they decided she should have it removed. I'm also for universal healthcare and all of us paying into the pot giving everyone access to healthcare and wellness care and prevention. I know that women who get abortions don't take it lightly and most aren't using it as a means of birth control, and unwanted pregnancy can be an ordeal that I can't imagine (my sister went through this as well), and thankfully unwanted pregnancy by forcible rape is relatively rare. Still I have my line and ethically.......well never mind.......it's just my opinion.

Understood, Tweety. :) I just wanted to state my case/opinions about abortion, birth control, and women's rights. I wanted to give my direct answer, not some politician answer. I'm sure this forum will come back to haunt me if I ever run for office or help someone else's campaign. :P I'm not mad or upset at any of you..just sharing ideas/opinions while listening to yours.

Anyhow, I'm not hijacking your thread, FB. I promise! Haha! In my mind, this all connects to your original post. :)

Understood, Tweety. :) I just wanted to state my case/opinions about abortion, birth control, and women's rights. I wanted to give my direct answer, not some politician answer. I'm sure this forum will come back to haunt me if I ever run for office or help someone else's campaign. :P I'm not mad or upset at any of you..just sharing ideas/opinions while listening to yours.

Anyhow, I'm not hijacking your thread, FB. I promise! Haha! In my mind, this all connects to your original post. :)

Alright! Happy threads! Serenity now!

-J

Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to listen to my opinion...which is all I was doing stating an opinion. :) Of which I think we're all allowed to do, even if it takes a post or two to clarify :)

First, I want to point out that I have commented less in an 'abortion rights' thread than Tweety; that is exceedingly rare, and I want 'self-restraint' points assigned to my account, please and thank you. ;D

Second, I can't help but notice that people here are talking respectfully about differing ideas on an emotionally charged subject; no one is screaming at each other OR posting gross pictures OR calling anyone else socialists or nazis. Very strange... but very cool.

First, I want to point out that I have commented less in an 'abortion rights' thread than Tweety; that is exceedingly rare, and I want 'self-restraint' points assigned to my account, please and thank you. ;D

Second, I can't help but notice that people here are talking respectfully about differing ideas on an emotionally charged subject; no one is screaming at each other OR posting gross pictures OR calling anyone else socialists or nazis. Very strange... but very cool.

First, I want to point out that I have commented less in an 'abortion rights' thread than Tweety; that is exceedingly rare, and I want 'self-restraint' points assigned to my account, please and thank you. ;D

Second, I can't help but notice that people here are talking respectfully about differing ideas on an emotionally charged subject; no one is screaming at each other OR posting gross pictures OR calling anyone else socialists or nazis. Very strange... but very cool.

I didn't want to start a new thread for this but has anyone ever heard of North Carolina's sterilization program or eugenics? I feel out of the loop because today was the first time I've ever heard of these things. Here's an interesting article about it and its repercussions:

Gettin' old, people; it's gettin' old. If I have an ectopic pregnancy-- which can not possibly result in anything other than embryonic death, whether I live or die-- under this law, I could be tried for premeditated murder if I had it removed before it caused my hemorrhagic death.

Seriously: what fucking country *is* this, again?! have I been somehow abducted to Qatar?! well shit-- where is the US consulate, and can anyone loan me a burka and a male escort to drive me there?!!

This is just so stupid... if this passes and isn't overturned, I swear to Buddha, I'm going country-shopping.

Gettin' old, people; it's gettin' old. If I have an ectopic pregnancy-- which can not possibly result in anything other than embryonic death, whether I live or die-- under this law, I could be tried for premeditated murder if I had it removed before it caused my hemorrhagic death.

Seriously: what fucking country *is* this, again?! have I been somehow abducted to Qatar?! well shit-- where is the US consulate, and can anyone loan me a burka and a male escort to drive me there?!!

This is just so stupid... if this passes and isn't overturned, I swear to Buddha, I'm going country-shopping.

Great article...annnnnnnnnnd!!! It was voted down!! Mississippi voted no on this issue!! Well done, Mississippi!!! :)

I thought you'd like this as well -- Planned Parenthood is getting organized for the 2012 election -

Gettin' old, people; it's gettin' old. If I have an ectopic pregnancy-- which can not possibly result in anything other than embryonic death, whether I live or die-- under this law, I could be tried for premeditated murder if I had it removed before it caused my hemorrhagic death.

Seriously: what fucking country *is* this, again?! have I been somehow abducted to Qatar?! well shit-- where is the US consulate, and can anyone loan me a burka and a male escort to drive me there?!!

This is just so stupid... if this passes and isn't overturned, I swear to Buddha, I'm going country-shopping.

Great article...annnnnnnnnnd!!! It was voted down!! Mississippi voted no on this issue!! Well done, Mississippi!!! :)

I thought you'd like this as well -- Planned Parenthood is getting organized for the 2012 election -